In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

3 An Overview of International Law and Arms Control I n t h e e n d , i t i s t h e r u l e o f l a w t h a t d i s tinguishes civilization from barbarism. It has taken thousands of years for humankind to develop into a community of civilized states, the majority of which are governed by law. Governments were formed in ancient times to provide security and an opportunity for economic development. Gradually the concept of the supremacy of law over the government and society began to prevail ; only slowly did the king accept that he too was subject to the law. Approximately 400 years ago, efforts began to bring the rule of law to interstate relations as well in order to promote a system of international order. Since the Age of Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, the world community has accepted this idea that governments must be subject to the rule of law in order to be considered legitimate. Agreements between states exist today 3 0 that affect much of the life of the world community. Commercial agreements such as the International Telecommunications Union and the World Trade Organization help to support the economic life of our planet. Many of these commercial treaties (as well as some human rights accords and agreements on the environment) have operated successfully for decades, but bringing law to the field of international security has proven to be far more difficult. There have been a number of attempts over the last two centuries. Today, most prominently, the Charter of the United Nations, adopted in 1945 after World War II (in which sixty million people died) attempted to establish a framework for order in a chaotic world. Pursuant to the principles of the charter, there have been treaties negotiated to limit armaments as well as to establish rules of international humanitarian law. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is the most important of the treaties limiting armaments, and, in addition to the United Nations Charter, is the bedrock upon which international security is built today. Rules of warfare have been developed, such as the Geneva Protocol of 1925 that prohibits the use in war of chemical and biological weapons, as well as so-called customary rules of international law (rules generally recognized by international tribunals due to their widespread and long-standing acceptance by the world community), for example , the rule of proportionality, which provides that in warfare it is contrary to law to respond to an armed attack with signi ficantly greater force than is necessary to repel and defeat the attacker. Some have argued in recent years that with the end of the Cold War, the subsequent increase in worldwide disorder, and the growing threat of international terrorism, treaties limiting armaments, rules of warfare, and international humanitarian law are all becoming obsolete. Such commentators imply that we will have to return to the code of the jungle to deal with the cura n o v e r v i e w o f a r m s c o n t r o l / 3 1 rent situation. Indeed, some have argued that treaties controlling armaments are only suitable in times of peace (when they are irrelevant) and that the gloves must be taken off in times of confrontation and terrorism. But what kind of world do we want to live in? Order imposed by force may be effective in the short term, but long-term security and peace in today’s world, as in the past, require rules that nations respect and cooperation among states of the world community . World order imposed exclusively by force has not succeeded in the last 400 years, as the many attempts at hegemony resulting in destructive conflicts has demonstrated, and it is unlikely to succeed now. World order can be effectively achieved only by the consent of the world community based on an accepted system of treaties and rules. For example, from the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 until the wars of the French Revolution beginning in 1795, there were no wars that could be considered total wars such as the Wars of Religion that decimated Europe in the first half of the seventeenth century, because warfare had strict limits that all of the great world powers understood and respected. Similar limits were placed on warfare in Europe between the final defeat of Napoleon and World War I by balance-of-power diplomacy. In...

Share